[Federal Register: February 15, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 31)]
[Notices]
[Page 7681-7703]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr15fe00-151]
[[Page 7681]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part VI
Department of Education
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comprehensive Local Reform Assistance; Notice Inviting Applications
From Local Educational Agencies (LEAs) in Montana and Oklahoma for New
Awards With Fiscal Year (FY) 1999 and FY 2000 Funds Under the Goals
2000; Educate America Act
[[Page 7682]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
[CFDA No.: 84.317]
Comprehensive Local Reform Assistance; Notice Inviting
Applications From Local Educational Agencies (LEAs) in Montana and
Oklahoma for New Awards With Fiscal Year (FY) 1999 and FY 2000 Funds
Under the Goals 2000: Educate America Act
Note to Applicants: This notice is a complete application package.
Together with the statute authorizing the program and the Education
Department General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR), the notice
contains all of the information, application requirements, and
instructions needed to apply for a grant under this competition.
Purpose of Program: To assist local educational agencies (LEAs) in
the development and implementation of comprehensive local improvement
plans directed at enabling all children to reach challenging academic
standards.
Eligible Applicants: LEAs in Oklahoma and Montana are eligible to
apply for grants. The Secretary is especially interested in receiving
applications from consortia of LEAs in each State.
LEAs or consortia of LEAs in Oklahoma and Montana that have
previously received Goals 2000 funds are eligible to apply for funds
under this competition. However, in order that other needy districts
may benefit from Goals 2000 support, the Secretary is particularly
interested in receiving applications from LEAs or consortia that have
not previously received Goals 2000 funding.
Note:
This competition, authorized by section 304(e) of the Goals 2000:
Educate America Act, is only for LEAs in Oklahoma and Montana. LEAs in
other States apply to their respective State educational agency for
funds under Title III of Goals 2000.
Applications Available: February 15, 2000.
Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: March 15, 2000.
Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: May 14, 2000.
Available Funds: For LEAs in Oklahoma: $5,410,428 in FY 1999;
$5,376,407 (estimated) in FY 2000; For LEAs in Montana: $1,890,358 in
FY 1999; $1,878,472 (estimated) in FY 2000.
In the event that there are an insufficient number of funded
applications to use all of either State's allotment, the Secretary may
reallot the remaining funds consistent with the Act.
The Secretary does not intend to conduct competitions for FY 2000
funds. Instead, pursuant to 34 CFR 75.253, the Secretary intends to
make continuation awards from the FY 2000 allotments to each grantee
that has made substantial progress toward meeting the objectives in its
approved application.
Project Period: Up to 24 months.
Estimated Range of Awards: $30,000-$750,000 annually.
The sizes of the awards requested should be governed by the size of
the LEA or consortium and the scope of the proposed project. The
Secretary will consider each applicant's request and the needs of all
successful applicants in determining the amount of each grant award.
The Department of Education is not bound by the estimates in this
notice.
Estimated Average Size of FY 1999 and FY 2000 Awards: $109,000
annually.
Estimated Numbers of Awards: 40 in Oklahoma; 20 in Montana.
Note: Consistent with section 309(c) of the Goals 2000 Act, the
Secretary will award at least 50 percent of each State's available
allotment to LEAs that have a greater percentage or number of
disadvantaged children than the statewide average percentages or
numbers for all LEAs in each respective State. The Department may
waive this provision if it does not receive a sufficient number of
applications from such districts.
Applicable Regulations: The Education Department General
Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) as follows:
(1) 34 CFR part 75 (Direct Grant Programs).
(2) 34 CFR part 77 (Definitions that Apply to Department
Regulations).
(3) 34 CFR part 79 (Intergovernmental Review of Department of
Education Programs and Activities).
(4) 34 CFR part 80 (Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants
and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments).
(5) 34 CFR part 81 (General Education Provisions Act--Enforcement).
(6) 34 CFR part 82 (New Restrictions on Lobbying).
(7) 34 CFR part 85 (Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension
(Nonprocurement) and Governmentwide Requirements for Drug-Free
Workplace (Grants)).
GEPA Section 427 Requirements: In preparing applications, LEAs
should pay particular attention to the requirements in section 427 of
the General Education Provisions Act (GEPA), as detailed later in this
notice. Applicants must address the requirements in section 427 in
order to receive funding under this competition. Section 427 requires
each applicant to describe the steps it proposes to take to address one
or more barriers (i.e., gender, race, national origin, color,
disability, or age) that can impede equitable access to, or
participation in, the program. A restatement of compliance with civil
rights requirements is not sufficient to meet the GEPA 427
requirements.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
(a) Background
Section 304(e) of the Goals 2000: Educate America Act (Pub. L. 103-
227) (20 U.S.C. 5801 et seq.) (the Act) authorizes the Secretary to
award direct grants to LEAs in States that were not participating in
Goals 2000 as of October 20, 1995, if the applicable SEA approves the
LEAs' participation in the program. Oklahoma and Montana were not
participating in Goals 2000 as of that date, and the Oklahoma and
Montana SEAs have approved LEA participation in this direct grant
program.
The Secretary has determined that grants awarded under section
304(e) will be used to support the development and implementation of
comprehensive local improvement plans designed to help all children
reach challenging academic standards. In particular, the Secretary
encourages LEAs to address in their applications how their reform
strategies might include enhanced preservice teacher education and
professional development activities of educators that are directly
connected to challenging standards.
Applicants that have already developed comprehensive improvement
plans may propose activities funded through the grant that are aligned
with and carry out parts of this plan. Where appropriate, LEAs should
use funds awarded under this notice to build upon comprehensive reform
strategies that have already been initiated with federal and other
resources.
Application Requirements
The authorizing statute--section 304(e) of the Act--permits the
Secretary to fund LEA applications that are consistent with the
provisions of Goals 2000. Grants under this competition will support
the development and implementation of comprehensive local improvement
plans to help all students reach challenging academic standards. Local
improvement plans that are developed or implemented with funds awarded
under section 304(e) must be consistent with the requirements in
sections 309(a)(3) (B) through (E) of the Act. Adapted to this direct
grant
[[Page 7683]]
program, these requirements specify that local plans--
(1) Describe a process of broad-based community participation in
the development, implementation, and evaluation of the local
improvement plan;
(2) Address districtwide education improvement, directed at
enabling all students to meet the State content standards and State
student performance standards, including specific goals and benchmarks;
reflect the priority of the State improvement plan (if there is a
comprehensive State improvement plan) and include a strategy for--
(a) Improving teaching and learning, with strategies such as
enhanced professional development and preservice education activities
aligned to the standards;
(b) Improving governance, management, and accountability for
performance; and
(c) Generating, maintaining, and strengthening parental and
community involvement;
(3) Promote the flexibility of local schools in developing plans
that address the particular needs of their school and community and are
consistent with the local improvement plan; and
(4) Describe how the LEA will encourage and assist schools to
develop and implement comprehensive school improvement plans that focus
on helping all students reach State content standards and student
performance standards.
An LEA that applies for funds under this program should indicate
whether funds are being requested to (a) develop and implement a plan
in accordance with the requirements of sections 309(a)(3) (B) through
(E) of the Act; or (b) implement an existing comprehensive improvement
plan that meets the requirements of sections 309(a)(3) (B) through (E)
of the Act. (An applicant that received FY 1995 and 1996 funding or FY
1997 and 1998 funding under the previous two competitions must have
completed the development of a plan that meets the stated requirements
in order to be eligible for funding under this competition.)
An LEA seeking funds to both develop and implement a comprehensive
plan must demonstrate evidence of a clear process that will result in a
plan that meets the stated plan requirements. This evidence may include
a description of how stakeholders will be involved in plan development
and specific steps and timelines for developing the plan. Successful
applicants will only be eligible to receive FY 2000 continuation
funding if they have completed development of a plan that meets the
plan requirements stated above.
An LEA that has already developed a comprehensive improvement plan
may seek FY 1999 and 2000 funds to implement the plan. The applicant
must demonstrate that its existing plan meets the plan requirements
listed above. The applicant may do this, for example, by providing a
description of how its plan addresses these requirements and the
progress the applicant has made in implementing its plan. In addition,
the applicant may demonstrate the comprehensiveness of the plan by
providing evidence that the plan is coordinated with other LEA plans
that, collectively, provide a framework for how federal and other funds
are used to achieve the goals and objectives of the district.
An applicant should clearly explain the strategies that will be
funded under this award and how these strategies are aligned with the
comprehensive plan.
The Secretary recommends that applicants reserve in their budgets
approximately $2,000 each year for activities that will be designed by
the Secretary, in conjunction with grantees, to facilitate the sharing
among grantees of information on successful comprehensive reform
strategies.
Selection Criteria
The Secretary will use the following selection criteria and factors
from 34 CFR 75.210 to evaluate applications under this competition.
The maximum score for all of the criteria is 100 points. The
maximum score for each criterion is indicated in parenthesis with the
criterion. The criteria and factors are as follows:
(1) Need for the project. (20 points)
(a) The Secretary considers the need for the proposed project.
(b) In determining the need for the proposed project, the Secretary
considers the following factors:
(i) The extent to which the proposed project will provide services
to or otherwise address the needs of students at risk of educational
failure.
(ii) The extent to which specific gaps or weaknesses in services,
infrastructure, or opportunities have been identified and will be
addressed by the proposed project, including the nature and magnitude
of those gaps or weaknesses.
(2) Quality of the project design. (33 points)
(a) The Secretary considers the quality of the design of the
proposed project.
(b) In determining the quality of the design of the proposed
project, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The extent to which the proposed project is part of a
comprehensive effort to improve teaching and learning and support
rigorous academic standards for students.
(ii) The extent to which the proposed project will be coordinated
with similar or related efforts, and with other appropriate community,
State, and Federal resources.
(iii) The extent to which the proposed project is designed to build
capacity and yield results that will extend beyond the period of
Federal financial assistance.
(iv) The extent to which the goals, objectives, and outcomes to be
achieved by the proposed project are clearly specified and measurable.
(3) Quality of project services. (15 points)
(a) The Secretary considers the quality of the services to be
provided by the proposed project.
(b) In determining the quality of the services to be provided by
the proposed project, the Secretary considers the quality and
sufficiency of strategies for ensuring equal access and treatment for
eligible project participants who are members of groups that have
traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national
origin, gender, age, or disability.
(c) In addition, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The likelihood that the services to be provided by the proposed
project will lead to improvements in the achievement of students as
measured against rigorous academic standards.
(ii) The extent to which the services to be provided by the
proposed project are focused on those with greatest needs.
(iii) The extent to which the services to be provided by the
proposed project reflect up-to-date knowledge from research and
effective practice.
(4) Quality of project personnel. (5 points)
(a) The Secretary considers the quality of the personnel who will
carry out the proposed project.
(b) In determining the quality of project personnel, the Secretary
considers the extent to which the applicant encourages applications for
employment from persons who are members of groups that have
traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national
origin, gender, age, or disability.
(c) In addition, the Secretary considers the qualifications,
including relevant training and experience, of key project personnel.
(5) Adequacy of resources. (5 points)
[[Page 7684]]
(a) The Secretary considers the adequacy of resources for the
proposed project.
(b) In determining the adequacy of resources for the proposed
project, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The adequacy of support, including facilities, equipment,
supplies, and other resources, from the applicant organization or the
lead applicant organization.
(ii) The extent to which the costs are reasonable in relation to
the objectives, design, and potential significance of the proposed
project.
(iii) The potential for the incorporation of project purposes,
activities, or benefits into the ongoing program of the agency or
organization at the end of Federal funding.
(6) Quality of the management plan. (7 points)
(a) The Secretary considers the quality of the management plan for
the proposed project.
(b) In considering the quality of the management plan for the
proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The adequacy of the management plan to achieve the objectives
of the proposed project on time and within budget, including clearly
defined responsibilities, timelines, and milestones for accomplishing
project tasks.
(ii) The adequacy of mechanisms for ensuring high-quality products
and services from the proposed project.
(iii) How the applicant will ensure that a diversity of
perspectives are brought to bear in the operation of the proposed
project, including those of parents, teachers, the business community,
a variety of disciplinary and professional fields, recipients or
beneficiaries of services, or others, as appropriate.
(7) Quality of the project evaluation. (15 points)
(a) The Secretary considers the quality of the evaluation to be
conducted of the proposed project.
(b) In determining the quality of the evaluation, the Secretary
considers the following factors:
(i) The extent to which the methods of evaluation include the use
of objective performance measures that are clearly related to the
intended outcomes of the project and will produce quantitative and
qualitative data to the extent possible.
(ii) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide
performance feedback and permit periodic assessment of progress toward
achieving intended outcomes.
(Note: In designing their evaluation plans, applicants are
encouraged to consider the sample performance measures included in
this package)
Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs:
This program is subject to the requirements of Executive order
12372 (Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs) and the
regulations in 34 CFR Part 79. The objective of the Executive order is
to foster an intergovernmental partnership and to strengthen federalism
by relying on State processes and on State, areawide, regional, and
local coordination for review of proposed Federal financial assistance.
Neither Oklahoma nor Montana has adopted State intergovernmental
review processes. Therefore, State, areawide, regional, and local
entities may submit comments directly to the Department.
Any comments submitted pursuant to the executive order must be
mailed or hand-delivered by the date indicated in this notice to the
following address: The Secretary, E.O. 12372--CFDA# 84.317, U.S.
Department of Education, Room 7E200, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW,
Washington, DC 20202-0125.
Proof of mailing will be determined on the same basis as
applications (see 34 CFR 75.102). Recommendations or comments may be
hand-delivered until 4:30 p.m. (EST) on the date indicated in this
notice.
PLEASE NOTE THAT THE ABOVE ADDRESS IS NOT THE SAME ADDRESS AS THE
ONE TO WHICH THE APPLICANT SUBMITS ITS COMPLETED APPLICATION. DO NOT
SEND APPLICATIONS TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS.
Instructions for Transmittal of Applications
(a) If an applicant wants to apply for a grant, the applicant
must--
(1) Mail the original and three copies of the application on or
before the deadline date to: U. S. Department of Education, Application
Control Center, Attention: (CFDA # 84.317), Washington, DC 20202-4725
or
(2) Hand deliver the original and three copies of the application
by 4:30 p.m. (Washington, DC time) on the deadline date to: U.S.
Department of Education, Application Control Center, Attention: (CFDA#
84.317), Room #3633, Regional Office Building #3, 7th and D Streets,
SW, Washington, DC.
(b) An applicant must show one of the following as proof of
mailing:
(1) A legibly dated U.S. Postal Service postmark.
(2) A legible mail receipt with the date of mailing stamped by the
U.S. Postal Service.
(3) A dated shipping label, invoice, or receipt from a commercial
carrier.
(4) Any other proof of mailing acceptable to the Secretary.
(c ) If an application is mailed through the U.S. Postal Service,
the Secretary does not accept either of the following as proof of
mailing:
(1) A private metered postmark.
(2) A mail receipt that is not dated by the U.S. Postal Service.
Notes: (1) The U.S. Postal Service does not uniformly provide a
dated postmark. Before relying on this method, an applicant should
check with its local post office.
(1) The Application Control Center will mail a Grant Application
Receipt Acknowledgment to each applicant. If an applicant fails to
receive the notification of application receipt within 15 days from the
date of mailing the application, the applicant should call the U.S.
Department of Education Application Control Center at (202) 708-9494.
(2) The applicant must indicate on the envelope and in Item 10 of
the Application for Federal Assistance (Standard Form 424) the CFDA
number of the competition under which the application is being
submitted (CFDA# 84.317).
Application Instructions and Forms
The appendix to this application is divided into three parts, plus
a statement regarding estimated public reporting burden and various
assurances and certifications. These parts and additional materials are
organized in the same manner that the submitted application should be
organized. The parts and additional materials are as follows:
Part I: Application for Federal Assistance (Standard Form 424 (Rev.
4-88)) and instructions.
Part II: Budget Information--Non-Construction Programs (Standard
Form 524) and instructions.
Part III: Application Narrative.
Additional Materials
Estimated Public Reporting Burden. Assurances--Non-Construction
Programs (Standard Form 424B).
Certifications regarding Lobbying; Debarment, Suspension, and Other
Responsibility Matters; and Drug-Free Workplace Requirements (ED 80-
0013).
Certification regarding Debarment, Suspension, Ineligibility and
Voluntary Exclusion: Lower Tier Covered Transactions (ED 80-0014, 9/90)
and instructions.
[[Page 7685]]
(Note: ED 80-0014 is intended for the use of grantees and should not
be transmitted to the Department)
Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (Standard Form LLL) (if
applicable) and instructions.
GEPA Section 427 Notice to All Applicants.
An applicant may submit information on a photostatic copy of the
application and budget forms, the assurances, and the certifications.
However, the application form, the assurances, and the certifications
must each have an original signature. No grant may be awarded unless a
completed application form has been received.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marcia J. Kingman, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20202-6400,
Telephone: (202) 401-0039, FAX: (202) 205-5870. This contact may also
be reached via e-mail at marcia__kingman@ed.gov. Individuals who use a
telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 between 8 a.m. and 8
p.m., Eastern time.
Individuals with disabilities may obtain this document in an
alternate format (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, or computer
diskette) on request to the contact person listed in the preceding
paragraph.
Individuals with disabilities may obtain a copy of the application
package in an alternate format, also, by contacting that person.
However, the Department is not able to reproduce in an alternate format
the standard forms included in the application package.
Electronic Access To This Document
You may view this document, as well as all other Department of
Education documents published in the Federal Register, in text or Adobe
Portable Document Format (PDF) on the Internet at either of the
following sites:
http://ocfo.ed.gov/fedreg.htm
http://www.ed.gov/news.html
To use the PDF, you must have the Adobe Acrobat Reader Program with
Search, which is available free at either of the previous sites. If you
have questions about using the PDF, call the U.S. Government Printing
Office (GPO), toll free at 1-888-293-6498; or in the Washington, DC
area at (202) 512-1530.
Note: The official version of this document is the document
published in the Federal Register. Free Internet access to the
official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal
Regulations is available on GPO Access at: http://
www.access.gpo.gov/nara/index.html
Program Authority: Section 304(e) of the Goals 2000: Educate
America Act, 20 USC 5884(b).
Dated: February 9, 2000.
Michael Cohen,
Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education.
BILLING CODE 4000--01--U
[[Page 7686]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15FE00.014
[[Page 7687]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15FE00.015
[[Page 7688]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15FE00.016
[[Page 7689]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15FE00.017
[[Page 7690]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15FE00.018
[[Page 7691]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15FE00.019
[[Page 7692]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15FE00.020
[[Page 7693]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15FE00.021
[[Page 7694]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15FE00.022
[[Page 7695]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15FE00.023
[[Page 7696]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15FE00.024
[[Page 7697]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15FE00.025
[[Page 7698]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15FE00.026
BILLING CODE 4000-01-C
Instructions for Completion of SF-LLL, Disclosure of Lobbying
Activities
This disclosure form shall be completed by the reporting entity,
whether subawardee or prime Federal recipient, at the initiation or
receipt of a covered Federal action, or a material change to a previous
filing, pursuant to title 31 U.S.C. section 1352. The filing of a form
is required for each payment or agreement to make payment to any
lobbying entity for influencing or attempting to influence an officer
or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee
of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with
a covered Federal action. Complete all items that apply for both the
initial filing and material change report. Refer to the implementing
guidance published
[[Page 7699]]
by the Office of Management and Budget for additional information.
1. Identify the type of covered Federal action for which lobbying
activity is and/or has been secured to influence the outcome of a
covered Federal action.
2. Identify the status of the covered Federal action.
3. Identify the appropriate classification of this report. If this
is a followup report caused by a material change to the information
previously reported, enter the year and quarter in which the change
occurred. Enter the date of the last previously submitted report by
this reporting entity for this covered Federal action.
4. Enter the full name, address, city, State and zip code of the
reporting entity. Include Congressional District, if known. Check the
appropriate classification of the reporting entity that designates if
it is, or expects to be, a prime or subaward recipient. Identify the
tier of the subawardee, e.g., the first subawardee of the prime is the
1st tier. Subawards include but are not limited to subcontracts,
subgrants and contract awards under grants.
5. If the organization filing the report in item 4 checks
``Subawardee,'' then enter the full name, address, city, State and zip
code of the prime Federal recipient. Include Congressional District, if
known.
6. Enter the name of the federal agency making the award or loan
commitment. Include at least one organizational level below agency
name, if known. For example, Department of Transportation, United
States Coast Guard.
7. Enter the Federal program name or description for the covered
Federal action (item 1). If known, enter the full Catalog of Federal
Domestic Assistance (CFDA) number for grants, cooperative agreements,
loans, and loan commitments.
8. Enter The most appropriate Federal identifying number available
for the Federal action identified in item 1 (e.g., Request for Proposal
(RFP) number; Invitations for Bid (IFB) number; grant announcement
number; the contract, grant, or loan award number; the application/
proposal control number assigned by the Federal agency). Included
prefixes, e.g., ``RFP-DE-90-001.''
9. For a covered federal action where there has been an award or
loan commitment by the Federal agency, enter the Federal amount of the
award/loan commitment for the prime entity identified in item 4 or 5.
10. (a) Enter the full name, address, city, State and zip code of
the lobbying registrant under the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995
engaged by the reporting entity identified in item 4 to influence the
covered Federal action.
(b) Enter the full names of the individual(s) performing services,
and include full address if different from 10(a). Enter Last Name,
First Name, and Middle Initial (MI).
11. The certifying official shall sign and date the form, print
his/her name, title, and telephone number.
According to the Paperwork Reduction Act, as amended, no persons
are required to respond to a collection of information unless it
displays a valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control number for
this information collection is OMB No. 0348-0046. Public reporting
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 10
minutes per response, including time for reviewing instructions,
searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data
needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information.
Send comments regarding the burden estimate or any other aspect of this
collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this
burden, to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction
Project (0348-0046), Washington, DC 20503.
Notice to All Applicants
The purpose of this enclosure is to inform you about a new
provision in the Department of Education's General Education Provisions
Act (GEPA) that applies to applicants for new grant awards under
Department programs. This provision is Section 427 of GEPA, enacted as
part of the Improving America's Schools Act of 1994 (Pub. L. 103-382).
To Whom Does This Provision Apply?
Section 427 of GEPA affects applicants for new grant awards under
this program. ALL APPLICANTS FOR NEW AWARDS MUST INCLUDE INFORMATION IN
THEIR APPLICATIONS TO ADDRESS THIS NEW PROVISION IN ORDER TO RECEIVE
FUNDING UNDER THIS PROGRAM.
(If this program is a State-formula grant program, a State needs to
provide this description only for projects or activities that it
carries out with funds reserved for State-level uses. In addition,
local school districts or other eligible applicants that apply to the
State for funding need to provide this description in their
applications to the State for funding. The State would be responsible
for ensuring that the school district or other local entity has
submitted a sufficient section 427 statement as described below.)
What Does This Provision Require?
Section 427 requires each applicant for funds (other than an
individual person) to include in its application a description of the
steps the applicant proposes to take to ensure equitable access to, and
participation in, its Federally-assisted program for students,
teachers, and other program beneficiaries with special needs. This
provision allows applicants discretion in developing the required
description. The statute highlights six types of barriers that can
impede equitable access or participation: gender, race, national
origin, color, disability, or age. Based on local circumstances, you
should determine whether these or other barriers may prevent your
students, teachers, etc. from such access or participation in, the
Federally-funded project or activity. The description in your
application of steps to be taken to overcome these barriers need not be
lengthy; you may provide a clear and succinct description of how you
plan to address those barriers that are applicable to your
circumstances. In addition, the information may be provided in a single
narrative, or, if appropriate, may be discussed in connection with
related topics in the application.
Section 427 is not intended to duplicate the requirements of civil
rights statutes, but rather to ensure that, in designing their
projects, applicants for Federal funds address equity concerns that may
affect the ability of certain potential beneficiaries to fully
participate in the project and to achieve to high standards. Consistent
with program requirements and its approved application, an applicant
may use the Federal funds awarded to it to eliminate barriers it
identifies.
What Are Examples of How an Applicant Might Satisfy the Requirement of
This Provision?
The following examples may help illustrate how an applicant may
comply with Section 427.
(1) An applicant that proposes to carry out an adult literacy
project serving, among others, adults with limited English proficiency,
might describe in its application how it intends to distribute a
brochure about the proposed project to such potential participants in
their native language.
(2) An applicant that proposes to develop instructional materials
for classroom use might describe how it will make the materials
available on
[[Page 7700]]
audio tape or in braille for students who are blind.
(3) An applicant that proposes to carry out a model science program
for secondary students and is concerned that girls may be less likely
than boys to enroll in the course, might indicate how it intends to
conduct ``outreach'' efforts to girls, to encourage their enrollment.
We recognize that many applicants may already be implementing
effective steps to ensure equity of access and participation in their
grant programs, and we appreciate your cooperation in responding to the
requirements of this provision.
Estimated Burden Statement for GEPA Requirements
The time required to complete this information collection is
estimated to vary from 1 to 3 hours per response, with an average of
1.5 hours, including the time to review instructions, search existing
data resources, gather and maintain the data needed, and complete and
review the information collection. If you have any comments concerning
the accuracy of the time estimate(s) or suggestions for improving this
form, please write to: U.S. Department of Education, Washington, DC
20202-4651.
Paperwork Burden Statement
According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, no persons are
required to respond to a collection of information unless such
collection displays a valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control
number for this information collection is 1810-0594. The time required
to complete this information collection is estimated to average 30
hours (or minutes) per response, including the time to review
instructions, search existing data resources, gather the data needed,
and complete and review the information collection. If you have any
comments concerning the accuracy of the time estimate(s) or suggestions
for improving this form, please write to: U.S. Department of Education,
Washington, DC 20202-4651. If you have comments or concerns regarding
the status of your individual submission of this form, write directly
to: Goals 2000, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW,
FOB-6 Room 3E213, Washington, DC 20202-6400.
Instructions for Part III: Application Narrative
Before preparing the Application Narrative, an applicant should
read carefully the description of the program, the background of the
program, application requirements, and the selection criteria the
Secretary will use to evaluate these applications.
The narrative should encompass each function or activity for which
funds are being requested and should--
1. Begin with an Abstract that summarizes the proposed project;
2. Describe the proposed project in light of the application
requirements and each of the selection criteria in the order in which
the criteria are listed in the application; and
3. Include any other pertinent information that might assist the
Secretary in reviewing the application.
The Secretary strongly requests the applicant to limit the
Application Narrative to no more than 20 pages (double-spaced, typed on
one-side only, using font no smaller than 11 point). The Department has
found that successful applications for similar programs generally meet
this page limit. In addition to the Application Narrative, the
applicant must include the cover form (SF-424), budget forms and budget
narrative, assurances, and a statement regarding how the application
meets the requirements of GEPA 427. Any supplemental attachments should
be limited to those that are crucial to supporting the integrity of the
applicant's project and how it has met application requirements.
Performance Measures
The Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) of 1993 places
new management expectations and requirements on Federal departments and
agencies by creating a framework for more effective planning,
budgeting, program evaluation, and fiscal accountability for Federal
programs. The intent of the Act is to improve public confidence by
holding departments and agencies accountable for achieving program
results. Departments must set program goals and objectives and measure
and report on their achievements. One important source of program
information on successes and lessons learned is the project evaluation
and other information collected under individual grants.
The U.S. Department of Education supports the GPRA initiative that
all agencies be held accountable for program success and is committed
to forging a partnership with grantees that will ensure accountability
in the use of Goals 2000 funds. To assist grantees in the process of
creating an instrument for evaluating program goals and achievements,
the form titled ``Performance Measures Template'' is included in the
application package. The Template identifies the key components for
measuring performance (Performance Objective, Baseline, Source of Data,
Outcome) and gives an example of each component. Applicants are
encouraged to incorporate the components of the objectives described in
their performance plans into the template; applicants may also use
another similar format. It is important, however, that all applications
are not only developed to achieve successful project outcomes, but that
they also include a process to measure progress toward attaining those
outcomes.
The performance measures will be used during the life of the grant
to ensure that project outcomes are achieved. Progress will be assessed
via regularly scheduled communication, which may include telephone
calls, letters, and site visits, between Department staff and the
project director. Where sufficient progress is not being achieved, the
Department and the grantee will work together to identify strategies
and resources to overcome challenges and resolve problems. When
necessary, the Department and the grantee may modify the performance
measures.
Performance Measures Template
Comprehensive Local Reform Assistance Grant (Goals 2000: Educate
America Act, Title III)State:------------------------------------------
District:--------------------------------------------------------------
PR#: S317A980----------------------------------------------------------
Consortium members (if applicable):
I1-2-------------------------------------------------------------------
I1-2-------------------------------------------------------------------
I1-2
[[Page 7701]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Performance objective Source of data Baseline Outcome
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Teacher Training:
As a result of providing training to A survey of teachers 25% of district At least 75% of
all teachers regarding the use of will be made to assess elementary teachers teachers will provide
test data to make instructional teacher proficiency in surveyed in 1998 instruction, as
decisions, by the conclusion of the using test data to reported that they indicated in their
1999-2000 school year, 75% of inform decisions about were proficient in lesson plans, that has
teachers in the district in the instruction; teachers' using test data to been differentiated
elementary grades will be proficient lesson plans will be inform instructional according to student
in using test data to inform examined for evidence decision making. proficiency revealed
instruction. of test data driven in the test data.
instruction; and
school administrators
will observe the
implementation of such
instruction in the
classroom.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Goals 2000 Comprehensive Local Reform Assistance Q &amp; A
Introduction
The following questions and answers have been prepared to assist
local educational agencies (LEAs) as they apply for and use funds
available under Goals 2000, and as they develop and implement their
local comprehensive improvement plans. This guidance should be read as
a supplement to the Application Notice, and does not replace any of the
information contained in the Notice. Please read the Notice carefully
to ensure that your application addresses all requirements.
In 1994, the Goals 2000: Educate America Act was signed into law.
The purpose of the Act is ``to improve the quality of education for all
students by improving student learning through a long-term, broad-based
effort to promote coherent and coordinated improvements in the system
of education throughout the Nation at the State and local levels.''
Through Title III of this Act, states receive funding to develop and
implement comprehensive plans for improving education and provide
subgrants to districts to develop and implement plans that are
coordinated with the state plan. In 1995, the states of Montana and
Oklahoma elected to not participate in Goals 2000.
On April 26, 1996, the President signed into law the Omnibus
Consolidated Rescissions and Appropriations Act of 1996, which amended
portions of Titles II and III of the Goals 2000: Educate America Act.
Under the Goals 2000 amendments, LEAs in a state that was not
participating in Goals 2000 as of October 25, 1995 may apply directly
to the Department for a portion of their state's Goals 2000 allotment,
if the state educational agency (SEA) approves participation of its
LEAs in the program. The Montana and Oklahoma SEAs have allowed their
LEAs to participate in the competition for funding. The grants will be
made for a two-year period.
Application Facts
* Who is eligible to apply for funding?
Eligible applicants are LEAs as defined in Section 14101(18) of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. In general, if an
agency is defined as an LEA for funding purposes, it meets the
requirement of eligibility for this federal grant competition.
* How do eligible LEAs apply for funding?
The Secretary has published a notice in the Federal Register
inviting applications from LEAs in Montana and Oklahoma. The
application deadline for the grant awards is as announced in the
Federal Register. The grant selection criteria and application
requirements are detailed in the notice. Funds will be awarded on a
competitive basis for the development and implementation of
comprehensive local improvement plans, or implementation of existing
plans, designed to enable all children to reach challenging academic
standards.
* How much funding is available for awards?
For LEAs in Oklahoma, the amounts available from the State's FY
1999 and 2000 allotments are $5,410,428 and $5,376,407 (estimated),
respectively. For LEAs in Montana, the amounts are $1,890,358 and
$1,878,472 (estimated).
* How much funding can applicants request?
Included in the notice is an estimate of how many awards could be
made with an estimated average award amount. These are only estimates.
The funding range provided is based on the allocations made to
Montana and Oklahoma Goals 2000 grantees in the most recent competition
(1998). The amount of funding an applicant requests should be related
to factors such as the number of students in the district(s), the
number of students in poverty or otherwise educationally disadvantaged
in the district(s), the needs and proposed activities of the district
in terms of implementing comprehensive standards-based reform, the
expected results of such activities, and other factors that create a
higher need for funds, such as high mobility of the student population
and extreme isolation from other resources. Please understand that the
funding provided is not for the purpose of implementing a district's
entire comprehensive improvement plan. Rather, the funding is
coordinated with other Federal, State, and local resources to enable
the district to implement an aligned, standards-based reform plan that
is designed to raise the achievement levels of all students and
simultaneously narrow the gap in achievement levels by different
populations within the district.
* How long should the application be?
As stated in the notice, the application narrative should not
exceed 20 pages in length. Attachments, other than those that are
required, should be kept to only those that are essential.
* How long will it take for the Department to review the
application? Who will review the applications and how will they be
reviewed? When will the awards be made?
The deadline for applications is the date announced in the Federal
Register. A period of approximately two months is then needed to
process the applications, conduct a peer review, and make funding
decisions. The applications will be reviewed by individuals from states
and districts that are familiar with the purpose of Goals 2000 grants.
They will score the applications based on the seven selection criteria
described in the application notice. It is anticipated that awards will
be made in early June.
* What are the reporting requirements? What are the future
oversight activities by the federal government for successful
applicants?
LEAs are required to submit an annual report each year describing
their activities and accomplishments. This information must demonstrate
that the LEA is making substantial progress towards achieving its goals
and objectives in order to receive second year funding. Applicants that
needed to complete development of a local comprehensive improvement
plan in
[[Page 7702]]
order to meet the requirements (as noted in the application) for such
plan must have a plan that meets the requirements before receiving
second year funds.
In addition to report requirements, Department staff may call,
visit, and/or convene multiple grantees to facilitate the use of best
practices, learn what strategies are working and aren't working, and
verify that the grant is being implemented according to the
application. The applicant is subject to a financial audit, as is the
case with any grant of federal funds.
* Will new applicants be given a competitive preference over
applicants that previously received Goals 2000 funding?
No. However, the Secretary is particularly interested in receiving
applications from LEAs that have not previously received Goals 2000
funding. An applicant may not receive funding to develop a local
comprehensive plan for more than one year. Therefore, applicants that
have previously received Goals 2000 funds must have developed the
required local comprehensive plan in order to be eligible for funding
in this competition. Other applicants can be funded to develop and then
implement plans that meet the plan requirements.
Writing the Application
* In the application notice, there is the requirement that
local comprehensive plans ``address districtwide education improvement,
directed at enabling all students to meet the State content standards
and State student performance standards, including specific goals and
benchmarks; reflect the priority of the State improvement plan (if
there is a comprehensive State improvement plan).'' What does this
requirement mean within the particular contexts of Montana and
Oklahoma?
Montana
The Office of Public Instruction (OPI) is implementing a statewide
initiative for school improvement in Montana. This initiative lays out
a framework for how the SEA will support districts and schools as they
further student learning. The plan consists of five elements:
Standards, Accreditation, Assessment, Education Profile, and
Professional Development/Teacher Certification. Applicants should be
aware of and align with the efforts that the State is taking within
each of these project components, where appropriate. The State has
informed us that as part of the standards work, the Montana Board of
Public Education and OPI, in partnership with various educational
organizations, has developed content and performance standards in
Reading, Mathematics, World Language, Technology, Science, Writing,
Health Enhancement, Speaking and Listening, Media Literacy, and
Literature. The Board of Education is currently revising and preparing
content and performance standards in Social Science, Workplace
Competencies, and Library.
Pursuant to the application requirement that districts address
districtwide improvements to meet these standards and Rule 10.55.603 of
the Montana Standards of Accreditation, OPI plans to provide guidance
to districts to incorporate the new content and performance standards
into the curriculum, establish curriculum and assessment development
processes, and meet the other requirements of the State accreditation
standards. In the comprehensive improvement plan required through Goals
2000, an applicant should include other strategies to implement the
standards, such as through professional development activities that are
aligned to the standards (see the application notice for the specific
types of strategies that must be addressed in the plan). Strategies
such as professional development are critical to helping teachers
develop instructional approaches to assist students meet the standards,
demonstrate exemplary performance that meets the standards, and use
data to determine what instructional approaches are working. The
funding available through Goals 2000 can assist districts to take these
critical steps to implement the state standards.
Oklahoma
The State of Oklahoma requires all districts to develop a
Comprehensive Local Education Plan (CLEP) to address school
improvement. In their plans, districts review implementation of the
state-mandated content standards, Priority Academic Student Skills
(PASS), and state performance standards as measured through the
Oklahoma School Testing Program (OSTP).
Districts should address school reform identified in their CLEP in
the goals 2000 application and focus on implementation of district
reform. While the CLEP forms the basis of a school improvement plan, it
may not fully meet the application requirements contained in the
notice. (See Application Requirements section.) For example, a plan
developed under Goals 2000 by a school district would include
strategies for improving governance and management. Additional
materials would need to be provided by the applicant to address those
elements not included in the CLEP.
* How should the local comprehensive plan be related to
planning requirements for all programs, federal, state, or local?
The comprehensive plan Goals 2000 supports should be the sole
comprehensive plan for the district. It is not a plan for use of Goals
2000 funds; rather, it describes how the district intends to improve
its schools, using all resources it has available. It is the district's
framework for reform.
Other plans the district may have should fit in under the general
comprehensive plan. For instance, most districts will have consolidated
plans describing how they will use Federal funds provided by the
programs included in the consolidation (or individual plans for each of
the programs). These plans should describe how Federal funds will be
used to support the comprehensive plan--the Federal contribution.
Likewise, technology plans could describe, in greater detail, the role
of technology in the comprehensive plan.
* How should Goals 2000 funds be used in relation to other
funding sources to support the comprehensive plan?
The local comprehensive plan should provide direction for how the
district uses all resources available to it. Goals 2000 resources
should be focused on plan development and on implementation activities
for which other funds are not available. Other resources that are
targeted to a particular strategy should be accounted for first. The
district can then determine the best use of the limited Goals 2000
funds. For instance, Title III funds, Technology Literacy Challenge
Funds (TLCF), are for the purpose of improving the use of technology in
the classroom. TLCF money could be used to provide professional
development in teaching standards through the use of instructional
technology. Goals 2000 funds could be used to help align curriculum
with the new standards. The alignment of funds creates the potential
for a greater systemic impact. Districts should consider the best use
of Goals 2000 funds in the context of the local comprehensive plan,
State plan/initiatives, and available resources. For instance, in
Montana, other possible uses of Goals 2000 funds could be to aggregate
standardized test data at the district level, disaggregate data by
gender, race, socioeconomic status, etc., and thereby help districts
develop a means for being eligible for Performance-Based Accreditation.
* The application requires that an applicant have a
comprehensive
[[Page 7703]]
improvement plan in place in order to implement it. Does this mean that
no implementation activities can be carried out until a plan is
completely developed? Do these requirements imply that a plan, once
developed, is to remain unchanged while it is being implemented? What
if an LEA has an existing plan that meets some, but not all, of the
elements required in the legislation?
If an applicant does not have a comprehensive improvement plan that
meets all of the plan requirements, its primary focus in the first year
should be to develop the additional components of its plan to make it
complete. In addition to these plan development activities, the
applicant may use funds to implement some of the completed portions of
its plan that will not be greatly affected by the other portions being
developed. For instance, a district that has completed development of
its standards and assessments (or uses those the state has developed)
may wish to begin professional development of staff in relation to the
standards while the parent involvement component of its plan is being
developed.
Plan development and plan implementation are not intended to be
entirely distinct activities. Once a plan has been developed that meets
the plan requirements of Goals 2000, continual revision of this plan
should be seen as a natural part of implementing the plan. Revisions
should be informed by data collected on student performance and the
effectiveness of various strategies. It is anticipated that districts
may already have plans that address at least some of the requirements
of Goals 2000. These plans that are already in place should serve as a
starting point for continued plan development; a district need not
start from scratch in developing a plan to meet the requirements. When
applying for Goals 2000 funds, a district should clearly identify the
status of its plans in relation to the plan requirements and the steps
it will take to complete its comprehensive plan.
* What should applicants consider in determining whether to
apply as a member of a consortium of districts rather than as a single
district?
By working together with other districts as a consortium, a
district can make better use of limited resources, improve continuity
of services for students, or broaden the expertise that contributes to
developing and implementing a particular set of strategies. A small
district that does not have a broad base of resources could form a
consortium with several other districts to create a single plan or
implement a common component of individual district plans, such as
professional development activities designed to help teachers create
and use classroom assessments aligned to the standards. Another
potentially strong consortium is one between districts that share the
same students, such as an elementary district that feeds into a high
school district or two K-12 district where students frequently move
back and forth between the districts.
Applying in consortium provides participating districts with an
opportunity to present a stronger need for funding, have higher quality
strategies, and have a stronger case to meet other selection criteria
for this competition. However, the purposes for a consortium, its
benefit to the districts, and the commitment by participating districts
should be clear. In order to meet the application requirements, a
consortium application should state whether a single plan is being
developed and implemented or whether a common strategy is being
implemented across plans being developed and implemented within the
individual districts participating in the consortium. For consortia
wishing to implement existing plans, each district in a consortium
should demonstrate that it has a plan to meet the plan requirements of
Goals law.
* How should an applicant use the Performance Measures
Template included in the application package?
Applicants should have clear and appropriate performance objectives
related to the specific activities proposed in the grant. A process for
measuring progress towards attaining these objectives should also be
identified as well as a means for stating outcomes. Applicants are
encouraged to incorporate the components of the performance measures
into the template, but they may also use another, similar format.
(Refer to Performance Measures and Performance Measures Template in
application package.)
* Are applicants for Goals 2000 funds allowed to use grant
funds to pay a consultant for writing a grant application?
No. According to a provision in the Education Department General
Administrative Regulation (EDGAR, 75.515), grantees are prohibited from
utilizing grant funds to pay a consultant for writing a grant
application. Consultants may be used when there is a need in the
approved project for services that cannot be met by an employee;
however, paying a consultant to write a grant application does not meet
this criterion.
* May local funds (other than federal grant funds) be used
to hire a consultant to develop a grant proposal?
Yes; however, the local district should be aware that occasionally
consultants use boilerplate applications. Such applications are
inconsistent with the aim of Goals 2000 grants which is to support
local school reform built on assessment, planning, and improvement
efforts that are tied to individual districts.
Resources For Assistance
U.S. Department of Education: Goals 2000 office
For assistance with application requirements: Marcia J. Kingman,
Goals 2000/TLCF, U.S. Department of Education, Phone: (202) 401-3900,
Fax: (202) 205-5870, e-mail: marcia__kingman@ed.gov.
Districts in Oklahoma
For assistance with state initiatives: Dr. Katie Dunlap, Assistant
State Superintendent, Oklahoma State Department of Education, Phone:
(405) 521-4513, Fax: (405) 521-2971,
Katie__Dunlap@mail.sde.state.ok.us.
Districts in Montana
Nancy Coopersmith, Administrator, Department of Curriculum
Services, Montana Office of Public Instruction, Phone: (406) 444-5541,
Fax: (406) 444-1373, e-mail: ncoopersmith@state.mt.us.
For assistance with standards-based reform: Dr. Belinda Biscoe,
Director, Region VII Comprehensive Center, University of Oklahoma,
College of Continuing Education, Phone: (405) 325-1729, Fax: (405) 325-
1824, e-mail: bbiscoe123@aol.com; Rita Hale, Training Associate,
Northwest Regional Assistance, Phone: (800) 547-6339 , Fax: (503) 275-
9625, e-mail: haler@nwrel.org.
For assistance with integrating technology with standards-based
reform: Dr. Jerry Chafin, Director, South Central Regional Technology
In Education Consortium, Phone: (785) 864-0699, Fax: (785) 864-0704, e-
mail: info@scrtec.org; Seymour Hanfling, Director, Northwest
Educational Technology Consortium, Phone: (503) 275-0658, (800) 211-
9435 (voice mail), Fax: (503) 275-0449, e-mail: netc@nwrel.org.
For assistance with understanding and linking to other federal
resources: http://www.ed.gov.
[FR Doc. 00-3509 Filed 2-14-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-U